Racing
© Jonathan Borba
Five grands prix into the 2026 Formula 1 season, not a single superlicence penalty point has been issued, even after the Canadian Grand Prix produced one of the heaviest race sanctions available short of disqualification.
That shift was clearest in Montreal, where Isack Hadjar received a 10-second stop-and-go penalty for failing to make a significant reduction in speed under double yellow flags and still escaped without any penalty points. In the same race, Hadjar also took a 10-second penalty for changing direction multiple times while defending against Charles Leclerc, while Oscar Piastri was given 10 seconds for causing contact with Alex Albon. None of those offences added points to a licence.
Canada stood out because the opening stretch of the season had been unusually quiet in the stewards’ room. Australia featured four investigated incidents with no penalties. China had only one race incident formally investigated, Esteban Ocon’s collision with Franco Colapinto, and Ocon received 10 seconds but no points. Japan did not produce a single race investigation at all, including for the clash between Colapinto and Oliver Bearman. Even Miami brought more contentious moments than the first three rounds but still relatively little punishment.
The absence of penalty points marks a sharp break from recent seasons. Over the opening five grands prix last year, sporting penalties were accompanied by penalty points on five occasions. In 2024, that number stood at eight.
According to information reported by Autosport and Motorsport.com, the softer application followed winter discussions between the FIA and the drivers. The push was to reserve penalty points for conduct considered deliberate or reckless, after previous concern that the system was edging drivers toward suspension for an accumulation of relatively minor mistakes. Those debates had been sharpened by Pierre Gasly’s position in 2022 and Oliver Bearman’s late-2025 situation.
The revised guidance now makes that discretion more explicit. In cases marked with an asterisk, the 2026 document states the listed figure “denotes the guideline MAXIMUM” and that “any number of points from 0 to that number could be imposed.” In effect, the stewards are now expressly told that heavy sporting penalties do not have to be matched by superlicence points.
That matters because the sporting side of the rules has not necessarily become softer. For failing to respect double yellow flags, the guidance still points stewards toward a 10-second stop-and-go penalty and allows up to three penalty points. For multiple changes of direction in defence, sporting penalties can range from five seconds to a drive-through, with up to three points also available.
Collision guidance has been refined further. The 2026 wording says “penalty points for causing [a collision] should be adjusted based on the severity of the incident caused,” and adds that a collision involving only very minor contact, described as a touch or “kiss,” may result in no penalty at all. At the other end, incidents involving “apparent deliberate or reckless intent” still carry four penalty points.
The result is a system that now appears tightly focused on only the most serious mental element of an offence, not simply the seriousness of the sporting breach itself. Canada exposed the tension in that approach. Hadjar’s double-yellow offence drew a stop-and-go penalty because it remains treated as a major safety matter, yet even that did not trigger points.
That leaves Formula 1 with an obvious question as the season develops: if superlicence points are now reserved for only the most extreme and rare cases, the system introduced in 2014 risks losing much of its practical purpose.